Laserfiche WebLink
MovingAhead Spring 2019 Outreach Summary 58 <br /> Assuming design work is done to reduce impacts to fronting properties where/when possible. <br /> As long as the commute improves <br /> As I mentioned, I like the EmX on River Road so think this is a better package. <br /> All the benefits of package A but also has a focus on the river crossing. Plan also has improves to <br />bus system for college students at UO. <br /> All areas receive some improvements, as well as investment in less advantaged areas. Includes <br />much needed EMX for River Road. Improves bike/ped safety and significantly increases <br />ridership. <br /> Again, prefer to help in some areas than not to do anything. Also like that it's poorer areas that <br />get help, not just fancying up South Eugene (I live in South Eugene, btw) <br /> Addresses worst problems, having a north-south EmX connection is a good idea. <br /> Addresses project goals d criteria overall. <br />Package C <br />Concerns <br />Cost <br />Too much <br /> Way too expensive. My priority is schools. Then parks and roads. Buses are further down the <br />line. The city wastes too much money as it is. <br /> Vague generalazations regarding roi of a 201 million dollar project. <br /> Too much of an impact with little return. And, in my opinion, eminent domain is legalized <br />government theft. It's stealing from people who have worked their entire lives to buy a home-- <br />and may well have to count on it for their retirement income! <br /> Too expensive. Potentially too many negative impacts <br /> Too Expensive, interrupts personal vehicle traffic <br /> To much money <br /> Seems too costly. <br /> Relatively high investment? You mean staggeringly high costs. Whoever is reading this knows <br />just as well as I do that there is no way the capital cost estimates on these projects are accurate, <br />let alone the operating cost estimates. Add in hidden costs due to increased burden on our <br />transportation infrastructure, longer commutes, and worsening air quality and this is a deal we <br />can -and should- refuse. <br /> Quite expensive and perhaps an over-build <br /> Not sure the cost will be approved <br /> Not sure the added capital cost for LCC corridor improvement is worth it, compared to Package <br />B. Need more info about the relative size of decrement to operating budget versus increment to <br />finance capital costs. <br /> It's just too ambitious and too costly. I still don't like the Coburg Road corridor enhancements. <br /> Its just package B, but now covering 30th. Still too expensive. <br /> I don't think the investment of $202M is worth it to shave off almost 4 minutes of my daily <br />commute. I'd have to live to be 175 in order to see any return. If you want more support, create <br />a package that will peak interest in those who work and ways to get those people to and from <br />July 15, 2019, Joint Work Session – Item1